Yoll From there, he factors in the rise of individualism in the twentieth-century. I borrowed this book from the library, and towards the end I found no fewer than three abandoned book marks. This is purely a technical aid in ensuring accurate accounts. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Review: Life Inc.
|Published (Last):||8 November 2016|
|PDF File Size:||20.32 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.4 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Start your review of Life Inc. I heard Rushkoff interviewed on radio and was intrigued by his talk. As some have noted the book is poorly edited, does not have a coherent structure and This book was a severe disappointment.
As some have noted the book is poorly edited, does not have a coherent structure and tends to repeat itself. One get the feeling there is quite a bit of padding to make what could have been a long article into a full length book.
Worse yet nearly every chapter starts with a first-name anecdote, a common tactic of the self-help books Rushkoff viciously attacks. The purpose of these anecdotes is to humanize the ideas and make them more palatable. But it is quite obvious that while these anecdotes might be based on real events Rushkoff might have experienced or read about, they are made up stories not factual accounts of actual events.
This type of writing, besides being patronizing, is essentially a form of propaganda and not intelligent analysis. He has an argument he wants to make and he fits the facts to match his argument, not the other way around. There are multiple example in nearly every chapter. All "debit" means is the left side of the ledger and "credit" means the right side. This is purely a technical aid in ensuring accurate accounts.
Profitable businesses want income to exceed expenses and assets to exceed liabilities, not credit to exceed debit which latter makes no sense. This criticism may sound pedantic. While accounting terms are complex, if you are going to make major arguments about how double-entry accounting moved us into the world of corporate dominance, at least make sure you are using terms properly!!
Things move downhill from there. The book is riddled with propagandistic arguments. His discussion about Nash and game theory is a good example. Rushkoff can be paraphased as follows: "Nash was crazy, so his rabid support of selfishness is an expression of some lunatic schizophrenia and since game theory selfishness is used to justify the free market, it just proves free market ideology is crazy.
Monetarism and its critique of Keynes is the main idea used in Reagonomics. Rushkoff presentation of this topic is the kind of argument one expects to find in a Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck kind of book, i.
Throughout the books it seems Rushkoff makes stuff up just to prove his point. For example when he talks about coins in the Roman empire he claims money was centralized and the empire fell becaue of debased coinage. Both points are factually wrong. The emperor controlled gold coinage but local currencies were used all over the empire. Debasement of currency was actually the way several emperors propped up the empire in times of economic crisis and if Greece could do it today it would go a long way to helping them out.
The fall of the Roman empire was a quite complex process and to blame it all on centralized currency and its debasement is ridiculous. Sure the late Middle Ages prior to the plague was a time of prosperity. Oh and did I mention the Crusades? To talk of this period as some sort of pastoral utopia is utter nonsense. I kept on reading the book because I was hoping to find some semi-intelligent discussion of alternatives to corporate culture.
Instead, Rushkoff insults and demeans anyone who does things differently than he would like. For example, people who work at non-profits are losers according to Rushkoff because obviously anyone who is talented and "energetic" will go work for a higher paying corporation.
Well yes, our government was equally or even deeper in the pockets of corporate elites prior and during the depression of the thirties. Yet FDR somehow managed to make changes which in fact helped millions of people and saved our collective butts in this latest crisis, depite 70 years of concerted effort to roll back all his reforms. However, that point is so obvious that it is ridiculous someone feels the need to write a book to make it.
And it has nothing to do with your attitudes towards corporate control. No matter what your political perspective, you should be out there working to make your local community, school, whatever a better place for you and your family and neighbors. He blames his own failure to fight the "system" including publishing his book with a big corporation and his bad parenting practices , in other words he blames his own moral and intellectual laziness, on the overwhelming power of corporations to rule our lives.
He totally ignores or demeans his and our ability to choose alternatives to how we live and act. He also totally ignores how throughout history and geography, most people never had more control than we do over the big things in life.
Life Inc. Quotes
Start your review of Life Inc. I heard Rushkoff interviewed on radio and was intrigued by his talk. As some have noted the book is poorly edited, does not have a coherent structure and This book was a severe disappointment. As some have noted the book is poorly edited, does not have a coherent structure and tends to repeat itself.
Life Inc.: How the World Became a Corporation and How to Take it Back
In Life Inc. This fascinating journey reveals the roots of our debacle, from the late Middle Ages to today. From the founding of the chartered monopoly to the branding of the self; from the invention of central currency to the privatization of banking; from the birth of the modern, self-interested individual to his exploitation through the false ideal of the single-family home; from the Victorian Great Exhibition to the solipsism of MySpace; the corporation has infiltrated all aspects of our daily lives. Life Inc. Most of all, Life Inc. The landscape on which we are living — the operating system on which we are now running our social software — was invented by people, sold to us as a better way of life, supported by myths, and ultimately allowed to develop into a self-sustaining reality.
Independent culture newsletter